====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On 12/2/2010 10:30 AM, Tom Cod wrote: > > Well, if this were some obscure issue of philosophy that would be well > taken, but it isn't, its a basic issue, one of recent history and current > events that Marxists should be able to explain to people without telling > them like a high school teacher to "look it up". Moreover, those platitudes > as regards self determination were at the heart of the best of what I > learned in the movement way back when and the authors thereof, like George > Breitman, would certainly have had confidence in explaining and defending > their views and not just brushed this important issue off. In that regard, > I note that Solidarity has expressed views on this issue in support of > Bosnian self determination which are a credit to that tradition. > > http://www.solidarity-us.org/current/ Solidarity's magazine Against the Current published an article by one Branka Magas with the title "How Milosevic's Serbia Became A Fascist State". Magas and her husband Quentin Hoare resigned from the board of New Left Review because they viewed Tariq Ali and the late Peter Gowans pretty much the same way Karadjis regards me. The Hoares have a son named Marko Attila Hoare who has the same kind of politics. He is a scholar with the Henry Jackson Society. Some of you are too young to remember Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. They called him the senator from Boeing. Here's Tariq on the Hoares: > http://www.counterpunch.org/gb02262008.html > > Global Balkans: Another question about the liberal-left > interventionists. I am interested in how these debates played out at the > New Left review of which you are an editor and contributor. I know that > Branka Magas and Quintin Hoare were former contributors who had a public > split with the New Left Review over these debates. They went on to found > The Bosnian Institute which played a very vocal role in lobbying for an > aggressively interventionist position in relation to Bosnia and Serbia. > I was wondering if this is something you would be willing to comment on > after several years of hindsight. > > Tariq Ali: I don't mind talking about that. In the New Left review, > there is no doubt that there was a division on the Yugoslav war. We had > people who do not like being described as Croatian nationalists, but > that was certainly the impression they gave us. They were certainly part > of the demonization of Serbia. They refused to see it as a civil war and > saw it essentially as a war waged by Serbia. Many of us saw this as a > civil war brought about by the European Union and by German intervention > to break up the country - two totally different ways of seeing the > thing. There was a discussion on it, and many other issues related to > the discussion, and finally a group of people left the New Left Review. > Or they would say we got rid of them. Which I don't mind, I mean I`m > glad we got rid of them. Because all of them moved to the right--some > became Zionists, most of them supported the war on Iraq. > > So what started as a scratch turned to gangrene very quickly. Branka > Magas and Quintin Hoare - who were dear friends of mine, I feel very sad > about it, I have to be honest I liked them very much - used to be total > Yugoslav supporters, Yugoslav nationalists. And initially, they made a > lot of correct criticisms of the nationalist currents in Yugoslavia. > Branka wrote some stuff which was quite prescient, predicting that > Yugoslavia would break up over this. But when the civil wars began, in > my opinion, they lost their balance and they shifted. That shift on > Yugoslavia led them further and further away from anything to do with > the universalist projects of the left. > > It would be strange if, at the time after the collapse of communism, > when the whole left was divided--people were changing their > allegiances--it would have been a bit odd if the New Left Review had not > been affected by this. It would have meant that we were totally isolated > from these movements. We were not, and I think people went their own way. > > I regret that they went that way, but I don't regret that we retained > control of the New Left Review. Because if we hadn't, just imagine what > the position of the New Left Review would have become - hostile to > Palestinian nationalist aspirations, sympathetic to Israel, sympathetic > to American Empire, sympathetic to the war in Iraq. You know, a sort of > universal cosmopolitanism to justify US interventionism. That is what > the New Left Review would have become. It wouldn't be the New Left > Review anymore. Then, we brought in a whole number of young people, > revitalized the magazine, and today I am very pleased to say that it is > more influential than ever before. It is translated all over the world, > it has a Spanish edition. It`s ironic that this division came about as a > result of Yugoslavia. I have no idea what they (Magas and Hoare) do. I > mean, I know about the existence of The Bosnian Institute. I don't know > who funds it, and I don't care. These are people who have moved on. And > I don't think much about them. There are other things to do in the world. > > (clip) ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
